Dave Collum dissects the COVID-19 origins, accusing Fauci and Burks of incompetence while speculating on a North Carolina bioweapons link, tying it to Epstein-related arrests like Diddy’s. He warns of QAnon’s role in distracting from Hunter Biden’s laptop—linked to nine suspicious cop deaths—and questions mass shooting narratives as potential DEW-staged events. Collum frames the deep state’s digital chaos as a post-2013 power grab, using AI and censorship to bury truths like FDR’s Soviet ties or Pearl Harbor foreknowledge. Economically, he predicts a 70% market crash due to unsustainable valuations, advising gold and platinum over crypto, while exposing universities’ DEI waste and wealth gaps trapping younger generations in stagnant wages. The episode ends with Collum and Carlson battling YouTube suppression, exposing how dissent—like Thomas Massey’s—is crushed under performative bureaucracy and media control. [Automatically generated summary]
Well, I think they first of all, they love the fact we're talking about whether it came out of a lab in Wuhan because that way we're debating whether to blame the Chinese or not, right?
When in fact, I think it came out of a lab probably in North Carolina.
A number of guys have tracked both the disease and the vaccine back years before it showed up on our dinner plate.
And this, you can follow the patent trail on COVID.
And you can follow the vaccine patent trail and watch it get moved around, move from point A to point B. If it was created in North Carolina, how did it get to Wuhan?
And because we were funding, we were funding research in Wuhan because we were not allowed to do gain of sorry, I keep capping the table.
So we made a pledge only to advertise products that we would use or do use.
And here's one that I personally use this morning.
It's Liberty Safe.
There's a huge one in my garage.
It is the company that protects your valuables.
High-end safelines represent the pinnacle of American-made.
They're made here in the U.S. Pinnacle of American-made security and craftsmanship.
They're more than just safes.
They are a safeguard.
They've got seven gauge thick American steel, and they're beautiful.
Any kind of pink color you want, polished hardware.
We have one.
They're really good looking.
They do not detract from a room.
They enhance a room.
I keep my father's shotguns and all kinds of other things in there.
You can keep jewelry, money, anything else that you want to keep safe.
When you put your belongings in a Liberty Safe, you can just relax.
Safes come equipped with motion-activated lighting, drawers for storage, locking bars, dehumidifiers, and up to 150 minutes of certified fire resistance.
You can customize them any way you want.
They are the best.
We highly recommend them.
Visit libertysafe.com to find a deal to learn about how you can protect what matters most to you.
Demand the best, Liberty Safe.
But to do clinical trials on foster kids, I thought after the Second World War, when both the Japanese and the Germans were doing things like that.
It was codified there, but in for scientists, but for the rest of the world and certainly American culture, we were taught that testing potentially dangerous drugs on people without their full consent or on the weakest among us or euthanizing mental patients or whatever.
Elite lawyer, now down a few notches because she worked for Trump and that always gets you in trouble.
Said that if Hunter Biden's laptop were ever released, no, if Anthony Wiener's laptop were ever released, the government would fall.
Wiener's laptop had kill switches in it.
I mean, it was filled with crap that wasn't supposed to be there.
We never get to see it.
Supposedly, nine cops watched the videos on Wiener's laptop.
They had to keep leaving the room because they couldn't stand what they were seeing.
And all nine are now dead.
And there's names and faces and deadness, right?
They're real people.
Now you can say, well, maybe they died for other reasons.
I go, but it's still nine cops.
And, you know, it's like the five cops who died after January 6th, right?
Four of them were suicides.
Out of, according to AI, there were about 80 cops really in the thick of things.
Four of them died from suicide.
I don't need any more information to wonder what the hell is going on there.
That's one of those standalone observations where I go, that's not right.
The math of that doesn't work for me.
I've got pictures of Ukrainian.
See, I'm going off topic.
I've got pictures of you known Ukrainian operatives with, I believe this, with the QAnon shaman guy, the guy with the horns on January 6th, at January 6th.
And so if he's Antifa, it's really odd that he was a nationally ranked cyclist.
What I know about nationally ranked anythings is their lives have purpose.
Now, there's a mugshot.
Did you follow this Patriot Front story?
I'm really, this is now the helmet's on.
The leash to the jungle gym is on.
The Patriot Front guys, those guys who'd stomp around looking like neo-Nazis who also were buff and had no pot bellies and covered their faces, get arrested and they're handcuffed with their backpacks still on and their megaphones still over their shoulders.
I mean, you can look at all of these different stories, particularly the acts of violence, which are, because they are acts of violence, are, you know, examined much more closely than any other kind of act.
And it like doesn't, it doesn't make any sense.
I mean, the shooting of Trump a year ago in Butler, Pennsylvania is.
There were bullets flying all over that place, but it was a catastrophically poorly set up defense of Trump.
But the guy who shot Thomas Crooks was the same guy who organized the protection of Trump.
And they say, oh, you know, he didn't get convicted of anything and other guys didn't.
I go, well, so the guy who was in charge of making sure that after the assassination was done, he popped the assassin is somehow not getting prosecuted.
Well, first of all, all the news agencies were there.
This was a totally irrelevant rally in an irrelevant place, Butler, Pennsylvania.
And there's a stranger story there.
And again, I just pick up these shards and sometimes they fit together into a story.
And sometimes it's just put it in your head, keep it there until you get more detail.
There's a guy sitting behind Trump named Joseph Fusca.
Fusca is his last name.
I've seen him before many times.
He was by the QAnon guys, which are a bunch of whack jobs, said to be, you're not going to believe it, said to be John F. Kennedy Jr. waiting to come back and save the world.
Turns out he was the head of the NW of the new Black Panther Party.
I go, Trump just got endorsed by the Black Panthers.
And then I saw Jimmy Brown, the running back, say he will be a president of the people.
And all of a sudden, and so I wrote, it might just be a flicker, but I think the black community is moving to the right.
And boy, was that ahead of its time.
And so what I won't do is write about something that no one's writing about.
Why?
The other problem I face is that I don't write about stuff I'm an expert.
I write about stuff that I know nothing.
So when I wrote about, I've been following Putin, but when the Ukraine war came, first thing I noticed, I bet you noticed it too.
It wasn't a war.
It was a police action.
And they weren't killing people.
They were moving troops across the border.
They were talking to Ukrainians.
They were, and I kept saying to my wife, this is not a war.
And you see some grandmother going, oh, this is just really terrible.
You know, and I'm going, that's not a war.
You want to see a war?
Look at Baghdad, day one.
That's a war.
That's what a war looks like, right?
You'd see an explosion from 20 miles away.
You wouldn't know what blew up, right?
My wife thought I was nice.
I go, it's not a war.
It's not a war.
Well, it became a war because, as you and I both know, NATO wanted a war.
And so it morphed from being a police action, which I think Putin was trying to throw a fastball past NATO's chin and saying back off on this whole NATO thing.
And so when I wrote about that, I found about 20 to 40 guys who are trying to get it right, which includes you.
It includes guys like Max Abramson.
Do I know that?
Do I have that right?
Glenn Greenwald, the guy who died, what's his name?
Ukraine's a bunch of really nice guys, super nice guys.
It's a democracy.
What a crock of shit.
That was a lie from head to toe.
We wanted a war.
We still want.
I have intelligence friends too, not like you, but I have them.
And I was talking to one the other day.
I think he likes to talk to me because he can talk to me about these subjects.
And in his universe, I'm the only guy he can talk to for which he does have to worry because everyone else in his world is connected to everyone else in his world.
So I think he likes to have real honest conversations.
We thought this through when we started this podcast a year ago, and we decided we're never advertising anything that we or people on our staff don't use.
Period.
We're only partnering with companies that we agree with and endorse actually in our personal lives.
So we want to announce a new partnership with a survival company we trust most.
Last Country Supply is the name of our collaboration, Last Country Supply.
I have a big surplus of survival food from that great company.
If you get a bucket of food with a 25-year shelf life, 2,000 calories a day, potatoes, rice, bread, drinks, you feel a lot better.
Let's say there's an EMP attack or civil disturbance.
You don't know what could happen in the future.
You are prepared and you are protecting your family with Last Country Supply products.
So head to lastcountrysupply.com to shop for a new collection.
Book up now.
There is no scenario where you will regret being prepared.
And so now there's, if you don't believe me, there's this document called Route 41, and they got stuff I didn't know about, but they also got stuff that I, so it's kind of an answer key for me to use academic terms.
And if you watch Route 41, you will see there were shooters everywhere.
There are cop cameras showing shooters.
And then, remember the guy got shot in the leg up on the floor where Paddock was?
Supposedly, on the anniversary of the Vegas shootings, supposedly Mohammed bin Salman had a party, locked the doors and showed a video of him getting sliced up and said to the royal sitting in the room, don't even think about it.
Now, when I wrote about Khashoggi, I was having a cow over Khashoggi, right, when he got killed.
I'm going, we're killing tens of thousands of Yemenis.
We killed 5 million people in the Middle East directly and indirectly due to our post-9-11 responses.
Yes.
Right.
And I called him ODK, one dead Khashoggi.
I said, it is insane to worry about one dead guy in a region of the world where people die for no reason all the time.
Who is at war with his own government, the Saudi government?
I mean, I'm obviously not for vivisecting people, but I also think like they're, yeah, there's a scale of evil and starving kids is worse than what happened in Khashoggi.
Well, as I was telling you, a friend's binding all my annual reviews and I will probably make $1,000 off this.
I mean, this is not getting rich.
I'm paid probably 0.001 cent per hour pay for this task.
I had to go back.
I've been proofing the drafts from previous years.
And what I noticed about 2013, 14, 15 is something's changed.
And what's changed is You could get facts and you felt like you were getting and the stories would break and they would stay that way and they wouldn't be shifting around.
And you could say, okay, here's what happened in here, here, and this piece fits in here.
And now you can't.
Now it's like, and we talked about using tripe metaphors.
Here's one, but I really like it.
It's like when your GPS starts randomly rerouting you and our GPS just keeps random, rerouting, rerouting.
They go, I'm not taking that right turn now.
So you just boot the GPS and you break out your gazetteer and you figure out where you're going.
Right.
And so our GPS is rerouting us constantly.
And one of your guests, Mike Benz, who I occasionally chat with briefly, who's very impressive.
And as I've said, I don't know everything about him.
And I don't mean just in a casual way.
I think there's a complex story there.
But right now he's saying the right stuff.
He gave a talk one day where he talked about how around 2013, the so-called deep state, which is a term I've tried to figure out where it came from.
And I think the guy gets the most credit is kind of Peter Dale Scott, who wrote about drug trafficking, Berkeley professor, and he called it deep politics.
But I think it predates that, but that's where I get it from.
He said the deep state realized they were losing control of the narrative.
They had underestimated the internet and social media.
I'd be listening to something and it would have useful information and all of a sudden then it would show the hole and here's Trump and his generals are going to save the world.
The point of it, and it's unclear, you know, who's behind it.
I have some theories, but people I know, actually, but I don't know if they're true.
But what I, what is obvious to me is that it was, it's a control mechanism, trying to siphon off some of that energy and move it in a siphoning off the energy.
Oh, yeah, you know, by looking too carefully into so the lake I'm on turns out broke the small New York State smallmouth bass record about three years ago broke the New York State largemouth bass record last year and I used to fish all the time when I was a kid and I haven't fished it what's wrong with this picture well if you've got smallmouth bass there I think you need to fish it on a fly rod it'll totally change your life it's not a fly rod it's a deep lake it's a um but you can catch them on the surface with a popper and if you do if you catch a sizable smallmouth on a popper and
fly rod you know i'm a 18 foot deep shoal guy sinking line but but so you know my wife thought that i had fish removed from my thumbs because she never saw a picture of me that didn't have a fish hanging off my my hand um but i haven't fished it because you're absorbed in trying to figure out what's happening raising kids i'm absorbed in other things my wife has issues i gotta help her with um and and and i i have this fear of buying a boat but
you as someone who has taken you know ample intellectual energy and intelligence and focused it on trying to figure out what are we watching which i think is like a fair way to describe what you're doing Like, what is this?
We should have been, one can make the argument we should have sided with Hitler and fought Stalin.
Patton said that.
So, and maybe there wouldn't have been a Holocaust, right?
You know, there's, but, but the, but Stalin was awful by any metric, and we, we, we weren't his ally.
Um, the story is that there were a few missing American soldiers at the end of World War II in Russian territory.
New 15 to 20,000 were missing, and we left them there.
And then you read about Pearl Harbor.
We all sort of know the Pearl Harbor stories now, what we're told, but I dug into that and you find out that Pearl, we knew to the morning that Pearl Harbor was going to get to, Stalin who was going to be attacked.
He wanted us to take the Japanese off his flank.
And FDR's right-hand man was okay with that because he was a Soviet spy, right?
Then I read about FDR and the Great Depression.
You find out that every single penny he spent trying to help the forgotten, Amity Schlays, the forgotten man, was spent to buy votes every last penny.
He was a sociopath.
And the only thing he could do was lie.
He was a compulsive liar.
His inner circle had to constantly cover for his lying.
And the only thing he's used for now is every time you want to grow government, you cite FDR.
And so I read a half a dozen books that sort of went at these different angles and wrote about it.
So I start out knowing nothing and then I write about it and I try to write to learn, which is the most terrifying part of AI, by the way.
If you take out the writing, you take out the thought.
So I think people who don't write for a living or aren't forced to write regularly don't understand.
This concept is a hard one.
But it's through writing, or I would also say speaking, public speaking, that putting concepts into words makes the concepts intelligible to the person who's articulating them.
Like you don't really understand something until you've been forced to write about it.
And everyone said, oh, that's just science fiction.
I go, well, Gorbachev seemed to want to get rid of them every chance he got.
So Gorbachev took them very seriously.
So it turns out what you do is you put something in space and it shoots some sort of energy guided energy down to the surface of the earth.
And it can, the different frequencies have different efficacies.
And so some are really good at hitting a target.
Some broaden out like microwaves are different than some sort of ultraviolet laser.
I'm not very good at this stuff.
And then I started reading about how what they do is they use a pulse of one laser to punch a hole through the atmosphere and then the second pulse would go through that hole.
It's really clever stuff.
This is 40-year-old Rand reports.
What do they have behind the paywall 40 years later?
Now, the best, I think, evidence of a DEW being used, and I was reading about fires in different places where trees were burning that shouldn't have burned and cars.
I wrote about it.
If someone wants to go read it, that was a couple of years ago.
The best evidence of a DEW.
So if you've got these, you got to test them, right?
It's like why you need bioweapons labs in Ukraine.
You got to test them.
You can't use lab rats.
You look at the Quebec fires, satellite imagery of the Quebec fires.
Very mysterious.
About 26-ish fires started simultaneously.
How do you know something?
Well, if a fire starts and then another one starts, it'll be downwind.
So you'll see it'll look like the Hawaiian Islands, right?
So your basic overarching theory is around 2014-15, it became clear to the people running the world that you can't keep information under wraps anymore because the internet is impossible to control.
And so you had to flood people's brains with extraneous and misleading information.
Look at the ambushes that occurred when Thomas Massey, who I think is great, Rand Paul, who I think has matured immensely, and who is the third Republican who stepped away from the narrative and all of a sudden the attacks were relentless.
No, I agree with you, but I just find what's so interesting, and there's a religious quality to all of these conversations that I find so striking.
It's like, it's okay if you have, you know, all this power, all this money, if you're running the U.S. government or whoever you are with a lot of power, you know, you can afford to have some percentage of the population not play along.
You don't need, it doesn't need to be an Albanian election in 1982.
If the system is like, I'm sorry, you're an actual threat.
We have to kill you.
Okay.
Systems exist to preserve themselves.
I understand that.
What I really can't even comprehend is someone out there in a place I've never been and never will go among 350 million people is making a noise that I disagree with.
I must crush him.
What is that?
That's just weird to me.
Why are you going to the effort to shut down all dissent?
If I walked over the arts squad, I'd see some Looney Tunes, right?
And we're now destroying.
The cost of an education is too high to waste it.
And so if you're going to spend $300,000, you can't go into a career that you make $40,000 or that you make $25,000 because you're a barista.
It's just no longer even viable.
So you have to.
So colleges, if I were president of Cornell, I'd put together an elite committee of people I absolutely trusted and say, you guys are in charge of trying to figure out where we should be in 20 years and how to get there because we can't be here in 20 years.
It's not going to work.
Arts and sciences and this whole idea of this broadly based education was formed prior to the cost and was formed when wealthy people went to college.
So you could be frivolous if you wanted.
And getting a sheepskin could get you onto Wall Street and be the lead analyst for all the dot-com's Henry Blodgett style, right?
Those days are gone.
And so colleges are going to have to tighten up.
But my colleagues are, I would say, on average, out of 30 colleagues, I'll say maybe I think 27 of them are left of center.
And I can't explain why.
Now, when I talked to them, they were totally rational people, totally reasonable people.
The way it works as a chemist is you are an entrepreneur.
You get a job.
They give you startup money to get started.
You have to then go raise money.
Funding rates are ballpark, maybe 15% of the people who get funded.
By the way, the ones who never get funded, they've dropped off.
So that 15% is people still trying.
And I'm going to brag, I put 21 in a row successfully.
Do the math on that.
That's improbable.
But my colleagues are constantly battling.
They're putting together this program.
They're running research groups of anywhere from 5 to 30.
No one pays for that.
They raise the money from the federal system.
You say, well, the Fed shouldn't pay the money.
Well, years and years ago, we decided the way to run a research program in the United States was through universities and federal grants.
It was a Sputnik thing.
There's other ways to do it, but we set up that system.
And if you look at all the startup companies around the country and all the pharmaceutical agents, they all, you can trace their origins back to academic labs.
Pfizer discovers far fewer drugs than they buy from some small startup that came out of some biochemistry department or some medical school or something.
And so the academic research area is the foundation level starting point.
I have a number of friends who are worth a fortune because they patented something.
And that's actually good because it would be neutered and not even usable by the free market if it didn't have the patent coverage.
And so it made sense.
So it puts an incentive system in there, right?
Cornell gets some, the investigator gets some, the department gets some, and the world gets a new drug.
It's not a crazy system.
Now, there's other ways to do it, but that's not how we do it.
And we produce the best science.
So it worked.
Now, the problem is that Trump threw a fastball past our chin, and we deserved it.
We absolutely deserved it.
So he's saying, look, get rid of the guys in sports, which Penn did with Leah Thomas.
You know, get rid of the DEI, which a lot of schools are trying to.
And at the same time, ducking, naming them by different things.
But the fastball was needed.
The problem is, as you said at breakfast, it was the social stuff that Trump was going after.
But you don't go after the social stuff with social stuff.
So for I'm going to just complete the thought by saying it's the no tax part that I think drives some of us to want to sort of storm the campus with guns because that's, you know, everyone's getting, I mean, the private equity guys are taking all their income as interest, so they're paying half the rate.
But for a normal person, you know, you're paying over half of everything you make to the government and it's being spent on nonsense or given to Ukraine.
And then there are these giant hedge funds called university endowments that aren't paying any taxes.
And I think that can really drive people bonkers, including me.
Again, it's not to say that you're not 100% correct, but I at least want to say to your listeners, so they understand what they're complaining about.
First and foremost, there supposedly are rules where the universities are not supposed to be competing with the private sector.
And they get around those.
But if Cornell builds housing, is making money off the housing in town.
That kind of breaks the rule, right?
But they build dorms and things like that.
So you're right about that.
The endowments are a funny game.
First and foremost, I looked this up last week.
Approximately 50% of all endowment spin off.
So it spins off at revenue and Harvard's has been collecting since 1656.
50% of the money spun off goes to financial aid, which means making college more affordable, admittedly not very affordable for a lot of people, but making it more affordable.
So half of the money being spun off is going right back to education of the students.
Another 20% supposedly is for academic programs, which means paying for things that would have have to be paid for or we'd have to do without.
And I would argue we got bloated.
So there's things we should have done without.
If you looked at the dining program now compared to what they have now, it's really unbelievable.
The administrative bloat is a combination of all the problems that drive you nuts and the fact that the interactions between the university and the feds and the states has gotten more complicated.
And again, the DEI, Michigan's DEI payroll was 93 million last time I read about it.
That's a lot of money, right?
But just when you get a federal grant, there's so many things you have to do.
It used to, they ran it out of a shoebox.
Here's your check.
Spend it wisely.
It's no longer like that.
Now it reached the absurd point where you're supposed to make statements about how you're going to save the whales and donate organs to Guatemalan orphans and things like that.
And I think Trump's going to successfully get a lot of that crap out of there.
He would save Cornell a fortune if he could get rid of all of DI.
Now, I do think the original idea of affirmative action makes sense.
It basically said, go find people who are being missed.
Look into the dusty corners where you normally don't look and see if you find talent, right?
And the reason it has problems is because when Kaplan got a hold of it, and they for profit coached kids on how to do well, and then they made it such that the SAT could be taking three times and you get to use only the one you like.
All of a sudden, the cost of maximizing your score on the SAT became prohibitive.
And so it's a legitimate argument that someone coming out of the hood cannot take the Kaplan course and take the SAT3.
But you shouldn't get rid of it.
You should just be aware of what it's telling you.
Faster, the more people watched, the faster he went.
Ironically, the overachiever got to Cornell and got lost.
The underachiever got just grew nicely in college.
And now the younger one is now a professional after trying cubicle farming and all that crap that you get by being a business major at Cornell Hotel School.
So I want to ask you here, since you mentioned the struggle, you know, the triumph, but also the struggle to pay for it because the economy doesn't support young people very well.
Since you did call the financial collapse of 2008, it sounds like in 2002.
In 2002.
So you couldn't short, you couldn't get rich shorting anything.
So college graduates, even Ivy League graduates, humanities graduates, not engineers or chemists, but the business guy or whatever, they're having trouble getting jobs.
Well, so this is a normal sort of, it's a distorted version of, I think, a recession coming or in.
Now, where it gets complicated is if you don't believe the inflation numbers, which I don't, and you've got Chapwood Index and shadow stats that give inflation numbers that are probably on average six or seven percent higher than the official numbers.
The official numbers are corrupted.
And I don't want to go into it because it's technical, but the CPI is crap.
So the fact that your economy is now growing again, if it's coming out of a hole, as far as I'm concerned, you're not out until you've gotten past that previous period.
But, you know, private equity buys, private equity buys, has bought up 80% of the hospitals, the healthcare.
And what they do is they go in and they buy some organization.
They strip it of its assets.
They load it with debt.
They pay themselves huge fees and bonuses.
And then they sell the shell of a company, which is now effectively worthless, into the marketplace, like to pension funds who are not smart enough to recognize that they just bought a piece of crap.
And according to Gretchen Morgenson, a 47% bankruptcy rate.
Now, post-sale.
Post-sale.
Now, as long as it's profitable to buy viable companies, destroy them, sell the shell and make money, monetary money's too loose.
Precious capital.
If capital is of real value, it's a moat.
So good businessman can get capital, bad businessman can't.
The fact that BlackRock could buy single-family dwellings, which is a terrible business, you really can't make money unless you can, unless there's a housing boom and you leverage up to hell, the fact that they could get it for at an interest rate of 0.15% Is a highly flawed system, and that's where the inventory went after 07 to 09.
It got bought up by these guys who could lever up and then charge rents to people.
So they basically scooped up the housing market now with free with free money.
With free money, kind of free money, unlike credit cards, which are 25%, right?
And the reason the market's important is because of the wealth effect.
And that is that if you own equities, you own a house and they're soaring in price, your spending habits change.
I'm having a great year, for example.
So when the Bank of Dad has to provide some liquidity to the children, I feel okay about it, right?
The problem is, is that it's a false wealth.
It's not real wealth.
It's a false wealth.
So what happened?
Well, I'm getting tired of seeing these.
I see four-year plots of the equity market and they make various comparisons.
I go, don't go back four years.
Don't go back 40 years.
Go back 120 years.
So I follow about 25 metrics of valuation.
Valuation is inherently a price of the market relative to something it ought to track, whether it's the earnings, the revenues, the book value.
I think Altobin's Q, the GDP, which is a fictional number, as I've heard you recently say.
But I follow about 25 of them.
So you can kind of track where the markets have gotten expensive relative to the thing it ought to track.
Now, around 1981, the markets were at the cheapest valuation, arguably in history.
Inflation was scaring everyone, which is why they were cheap.
It turns out that the boomers were just hitting the workforce.
So demographics was a huge tailwind starting around then.
And most economists agree demographics is huge.
Now, I'm disingenuous in that I quote economists selectively.
In the next sentence, I'll probably say something horrible about them.
And so I'm obviously cherry-picking my data, but economists like demographics.
So the boomers hit the workplace.
So it was almost guaranteed.
I think Reagan was not important.
I think he did some very important things, but I think whoever got to be president was going to be at the beginning of a boom.
It turns out that China was coming out of the dark ages.
They started selling labor at slave wages.
They were so desperate for capital when they sent their leader, don't make me pronounce his name, to the United Nations when he first started opening up.
If you buy, if you own the top, people always say, well, how long did it take to get back to the top?
That's a favorite question.
You go, oh, you know, it took 22 years.
Oh, it took 15 years.
Oh, it took.
I like to ask the question, no, no, no.
Not how long it took to get from the top back to even.
How long did it take to go from that top to the last time that that price was attained, adjusted for inflation?
And those can go anywhere from 40 to 75 years.
All you have to do is look at inflation-adjusted S ⁇ P and draw a line from a top across the S ⁇ P. And you will find that most of them break even in the mid-80s, no matter what year they started.
Do you want to buy that into that market that somehow seems like it has to regress because you can't have people going 56 years without owning a house, right?
You personally, I think it was in Turning Point USA, you went absolutely nonstop about how you can worry about Ukraine, but we've got guys, we've got young adults who can't raise families and houses.
One of the things that my peers who were paranoid as hell about this, some very smart guys, they tend not to put numbers on it.
I'm one of the few who puts numbers on it.
There's a couple others who do, but they just say, oh, the evaluations are ridiculous.
But no one wants to be on record that we're going to be, to say it's catastrophically overpriced, whatever correction you get, you say, see, I told you.
That means I think if I were smart and I were going to bring in central bank digital currency, which is an authoritarian nightmare, I would do it the way they did.
I'd release the crypto.
I'd have guys pumping it.
I'd have guys supporting it.
I'd let them debug the networks and the kinks and acclimate people to it.
Here's what I watched for years and then jumped in.
And it's a problem.
The modern market, I bought gold steadily from 99 through about 03.
And then I bought some more when it was around 1,200 in the teens.
I said, okay, it's kind of flattened out.
I'm going to get some more.
So around, bought it around $1,200 in maybe 2016 or something.
But the modern markets don't wait.
If you get a good idea and social media stuff, it will close up that gap so fast you won't know what hit you.
So I'm bullish on energy, long-term energy equities and stuff, but I think they're going to sell before they become a good buy.
And so I just can't commit a lot of money to the energy, even though I think I have some mutual funds on uranium-based investments, which I think we got to go to.
And now it looks like we are.
I actually think AI is not demanding nuclear energy.
I think AI is being used as a Trojan horse to bring in nuclear energy, which I support.
I think they're using the buzz of AI to say, now let's get the nukes going.
People say, yeah, nukes, we need it for the AI.
We've needed nukes.
It was the obvious next thing to go to.
Platinum.
For years I watched platinum.
Own so little platinum that if it went to zero, I wouldn't even notice.
I mean, trivial, trivial amount.
And I've been watching it.
It's been flat.
I mean, flat, as in like a flat line, not moving away from $900 an ounce by a few dollars flat for 10 years after dropping.
And I go, what's the platinum story?
Well, the platinum story is I don't trade.
I don't trade at all.
If I buy it, I'm buying it saying, look, I'm hanging on to it.
If it goes down, I don't trade.
The platinum story is, I don't believe in the EV.
I don't think it's a good technology.
I think it'll be here, but I don't think it's going to take over the world.
I think the hybrids are going to take over the world.
They use more platinum than EV than internal combustion engines because their catalytic inverters burn colder.
So they need more platinum.
Now, here's where it gets real interesting.
The platinum miners are in Russia and South Africa.
Russia will therefore have control.
South Africa could become a failed state so fast, you know, it would hit you, right?
More to the point, and again, trying to get real facts on this stuff, but the above-ground platinum supply, the available platinum supply is something like $3 billion, which is something a medium-sized hedge fund could buy at current prices.
It's been in deficit production for at least four years.
So let me ask you just a wrap-up question, which is given your description of where we are, and you haven't even mentioned what could be a debt crisis when people stop buying our debt or slow down.
But there are all kinds of things to worry about that seem imminent.
And if there's a way to fake it so it doesn't happen, then it means you're just deluding as to what actually happened.
You're not getting a reality.
And so the bottom line is that the boomer demographic almost by definition was going to generate a bubble, a big mother bubble because of the demographics.
Now, I was telling you about how I was reading my old write-ups from like 13, 14, 15.
I make a compelling case that the markets were crazy.
How do I do it?
I use numbers, I use stats, and I use quotes from the most famous money guys in the world.
Paul Tudor-Jones, Stan Druckenmiller, you name it.
These are not lightweights saying these markets are insanely overvalued in 2015.
But if I found something that I thought was dirt cheap, I'm glad I own the gold from as cheap as I did because when it goes down, I go, I'm still up, what, 15-fold or something, right?
So it makes it easier.
Buying gold now from scratch would be harder.
It would be that, you know, the number of dollars to get the percent position, that sort of thing.
And I think the debt problem is global.
If you actually look at the metrics for the growth in the global debt relative to global GDP, the entire world has become priced much more than 10 years ago relative to what the world produces.
So it turns out that YouTube is suppressing this show.
On one level, that's not surprising.
That's what they do.
But on another level, it's shocking with everything that's going on in the world right now, all the change taking place in our economy and our politics with the wars on the cusp of fighting right now.
Google has decided you should have less information rather than more.
And that is totally wrong.
It's immoral.
What can you do about it?
Well, we could whine about it.
That's a waste of time.
We're not in charge of Google.
Or we could find a way around it, a way that you could actually get information that is true, not intentionally deceptive.
The way to do that on YouTube, we think, is to subscribe to our channel.
Subscribe.
Hit the little bell icon to be notified when we upload and share this video.
That way you'll have a much higher chance of hearing actual news and information.